BX7I5Q 
I.S3F5 
F3 


<^sr^7Si$^ 


oc 


DID 


THE  FIRST  CHURCH  OF  SALEM 


ORIGINALLY   HAVE 


A  CONFESSION  OF  FAITH 


DISTINCT   FROM   THEIR 


COVENANT? 


BY    JOSEPH    B.    FELT 


"  As  in  building,  if  the  line 

Be  not  exact  and  strait ;  the  rule  decline  ; 

Or  level  false,  how  Tain  is  the  design  !  " — Lucretius. 

"  To  lead  us  safe  through  Error's  thorny  maze, 
Reason  exerts  her  pure  ethereal  rays." — Fenton. 


BOSTON : 

PKESS  OF  EDWARD  L.  BATCH,  21  SCHOOL  STREET. 
18  5  6. 


THE 


FIRST  CHURCH  OF  SALEM. 


A  few  days  since,  a  tract  came  to  my  hands  with  the  title  :  "A 
Brief  Sketch  of  a  Lecture,  delivered  before  the  Essex  Institute,  May 
12,  1S56,  respecting  the  Founders  of  Salem  and  the  First  Church." 
The  author  of  this  work  is  the  Hon.  Daniel  A.  White.  It  remarks : 
"  The  main  purpose  of  the  lecture  was  to  correct  certain  errors,  con- 
tained in  two  recent  publications ; — the  Ecclesiastical  History,  by  Mr. 
Felt,  and  a  new  edition  of  Morton's  Memorial."  The  writer  of  the 
History  regrets,  that,  some  of  its  contents  being  thus  represented,  he 
feels  himself  obligated  to  clear  the  volume  from  such  a  charge.  In 
the  pursuit  of  this  object,  wc  will,  for  the  sake  of  lessening  words  and 
saving  time,  as  well  as  avoiding  personal  remarks,  personify  the  Sketch 
or  Tract  and  the  Book  or  Volume,  and  have  the  discussion,  as  it  were, 
carried  on  between  them. 

It  may  be  well  to  state  here  the  bill  of  indictment  on  which  the 
Book  is  so  arraigned.  On  its  115th  page,  there  is  a  note,  saying,  that 
the  covenant  of  1629  differed  from  that  of  1636.  On  the  116th,  the 
original  confession  of  faith  and  covenant  "  were  evidently  not  contained 
together  in  one  document,  but  were  separately  and  individually  acknow- 
ledged." On  the  267th,  after  an  allusion  to  Peters'  settlement,  as 
Pastor,  it  is  observed,  "  They  renew  their  covenant,  somewhat  altered 
from  the  first.  It  evidently  had  reference  to  events  of  the  time." 
Then  four  extracts  from  it  are  adduced,  and  their  application  men- 
tioned, as  bearing  on  several  occurrences.  This,  as  the  author  of  these 
positions  feels  assured,  is  a  fair  representation.  It  is  what,  as  already 
expressed,  the  Sketch  denominates  errors,  and  soon  after,  misrepresenta- 
tion. In  addition  to  this,  the  Tract,  on  p.  6,  referring  to  the  aforesaid 
extracts,  observes,  "  Yet  in  the"  Book,  '-it  (the  covenant)  found  no 
place,  excepting  some  mutilated  sentences,  introduced  apparently  to 


disprove  its  authority."  In  the  next  sentence,  it  intimates,  that  such 
treatment  of  the  covenant  is  unworthy  and  "  perversive  of  its  true 
character."  This  seems  to  have  been  honestly  considered  as  a  needed 
blister  to  quicken  the  perception  of  truth.  But  we  trust  that,  on 
fuller  examination,  no  sufficient  morbidness  will  appear,  requiring  any 

such  remedy. We  will  now  endeavor  to  show  that   the  preceding 

positions  of  the  Volume  are  correct,  and  therefore  neither  errors  nor 
misrepresentation,  nor  unworthiness,  nor  perversion.  To  do  this,  the 
general  divisions,  for  the  most  part,  adopted  by  the  Sketch,  may  answer 
our  purpose. 

I.     The  avowed  principles  of  the  Founders. 

It  is  an  indisputable  fact,  in  moral  as  well  as  intellectual  philosophy, 
that  principles  will  be  accounted  opinions,  and  so  in  the  reverse  com- 
parison, according  to  the  medium  of  faith  through  which  they  are 
viewed.  As  in  astronomical  science,  the  power  of  the  sun  to  attract 
all  the  less  globes  of  its  system  was  a  grand  principle  with  Coper- 
nicus, while  his  opponents  denounced  it  as  the  vagary  of  imagination, 
so  it  is  with  the  receivers  and  rejecters  of  the  great  doctrines  of  reli- 
gion. The  Founders  of  Naumkeag  highly  estimated  their  practical 
principles  of  Congregationalism.  But  they  looked  on  them,  in  contrast 
with  their  principles  of  Christianity,  as  the  shell  to  the  kernel  and 
the  husk  to  the  corn.  They  could  easily  discern  the  difference  between 
these  two  kinds  of  principles,  and  quickly  distinguish  them  both  from 
the  loose  speculations  which  drift  with  every  wind.  As  the  decision 
of  their  judgment,  the  principles  of  religion  embalmed  in  their  hearts, 
were  drawn  from  the  wisdom  of  Inspiration.  Could  they  rise  from  the 
dead,  and  address  those  who  greatly  applaud  them  for  doing  what  they 
never  did,  for  lightly  esteeming  the  doctrines  which  they  held  far 
more  valuable  than  all  worldly  honor,  they  would  say  to  them,  How- 
ever earnest  you  are,  we  count  such  praise  as  our  reproach,  and  such 
glory  as  our  shame.  They  had  no  need  to  be  taught,  that  a  reformed 
church  could  no  more  dwell  in  peace,  and  long  exist  together  in  pros- 
perity, without  a  specification  of  its  doctrines,  than  a  free  state  or  a 
kingdom  could,  without  the  declaration  of  its  constitutional  principles. 

What,  then,  were  the  doctrines  or  principles  of  these  founders  ? — 
They  imbibed  a  love  for  the  truths  of  the  Beformation,  stronger  than 
death.  Though  separating  from  the  corruptions  of  the  English  church, 
they  retained,  as  precious,  all  its  Evangelical  articles  of  faith.  They 
harmonized  with  Winthrop,  in  his  Treatise  on  Christian  charity : 
"  That  which  the  most  in  their  churches  (of  England)  maintain  as 


truth  in  profession  only,  we  must  bring  (where  wc  go)  into  familiar 
and  constant  practice."  "  The  essential  marks  of  the  church,"  which 
the}'  formed,  were,  as  John  Robinson  taught,  "Faith  professed  in 
word  and  deed,  shewing  the  matter  to  be  true  ;  and  order  in  the  holy 
things  of  God,  shewing  the  form  to  be  true." 

With  regard  to  the  doctrines  now  professed,  Chalmers  says,  they 
"  formed  the  seed  plant  of  the  churches  of  New  England."  That  these 
Ecclesiastical  bodies  mainly  harmonized  in  their  religious  principles, 
we  have  the  statement  of  William  Rathband  in  England,  16-14.  They 
"  are  of  one  and  the  same  way  in  church  constitution,  government  and 
discipline,  without  any  material  difference,  so  that  what  may  be  truly 
said  of  any  one  of  them,  may  be  believed  of  them  all."  Though 
Thomas  Weld  in  replying  to  his  work  differed  from  him  in  various 
points,  he  did  not  in  the  one,  just  recited.  These  remarks  are  placed 
here  to  show  the  pertinency  of  facts,  which  will  be  adduced,  to  the 
church  at  Salem  as  well  as  others  of  Massachusetts. 

Before  John  Cotton  came  hither  in  1633,  he  wrote  "God's  promise  to 
his  plantation,"  published  in  Eondon  1630.  In  this  he  says  to  our  set- 
tlers, "Have  a  care  to  be  implanted  into  the  ordinances,  that  the 
Word  may  be  ingrafted  into  you  and  you  into  it."  What  he  intended 
here  is  evidently  brought  out  more  particularly  in  his  twelve  articles 
of  1640,  "which  maintained  by  any,  the  church  may  receive  them  and 
keep  fellowship  with  them."  The  first  of  such  articles,  is  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity,  which,  like  all  the  rest,  is  of  the  Calvinistic 
order. 

While  writing  of  the  New  England  churches  in  1637,  but  one  year  af- 
ter the  adoption  by  Salem  Church  of  what  the  Sketch  declares  to  be  all 
that  remains  of  its  primitive  confession  and  covenant,  Richard  Bernard, 
a  Puritan  conformist  of  Batcombe  in  England,  makes  the  ensuing 
statement.  "  They  propound  epiestions  to  be  answered  of  such,  as 
come  to  be  admitted  into  their  church  fellowship,  as  about  the  God- 
head, the  Trinity,  their  works,  man's  first  estate  in  innocence,  the 
fall,  the  redemption,  Christ  his  nature,  his  offices,  faith,  the  sacra- 
ments, the  church,  the  resurrection  and  the  last  judgement."  With 
reference  to  such  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  Samuel  Danforth  of 
Roxbury  in  his  sermon  of  1671,  considers  for  his  subject,  "  the  Recog- 
nition of  New  England's  errand  into  the  Wilderness."  Addressing 
himself  to  survivors  of  the  primitive  emigrants,  he  observes,  your  ob- 
ject in  coming  hither  was  "liberty  to  walk  in  the  Faith  of  the  Gospel 
with  all  good  conscience  according  to  the  order  of  the  Gospel,  and  your 


6 

enjoyment  of  the  pure  worship  of  God  according  to  his  institution, 
without  human  mixture  and  impositions.  How  diligent  and  faithful 
in  preparing  your  hearts  for  the  reception  of  the  Word  '?  How  painful 
were  you  in  recollecting,  repeating  and  discoursing  of  what  you  heard, 
whetting  the  Word  of  God  upon  the  hearts  of  your  children,  servants  and 
neighbors?  What  searchings  among  the  Holy  Scriptures;  what  collations 
among  your  leaders  ?  What  fervent  zeal  against  all  manner  of  heterodox- 
ies?" The  religious  principles, mentioned  and  alluded  to  by  these  authors, 
are  neither  embraced  nor  indicated  by  the  Covenant  of  1G36,  and,  con- 
sequently, they  must  have  been  known  and  practiced,  as  a  confession 
of  faith,  independently  of  such  a  covenant.  What  they  so  confidently 
tell  us,  is  not  invalidated,  but  strengthened,  by  the  remarks  preceding 
them.     While  those  make  out  a  probability,  these  afford  a  certainty. 

Taking,  then,  the  foregoing  considerations  together,  what  shall  we 
say  of  them?  Do  they  contradict  the  position  of  the  Volume,  that  the 
original  confession  and  covenant  of  the  Church  in  view,  were  seperate 
and  distinct  instruments  ?  No,  they  confirm  it  as  true  and  worthy  of 
all   acceptation. 

II.  Primitive  history  in  relation  to  Salem  Church.  Among  the  va- 
rious accounts  of  gathering  this  body,  the  one  given  by  Morton  in  his 
Memorial,  p.  101-3,  ed.  1721,  is  satisfactory  and  appropriate.  He  in- 
forms us  that  Messrs.  Higginson  and  Skelton  consulted  with  Governor 
Endicott  "about  settling  a  reformed  congregation."  There  was  a  hearty 
concurrence  on  the  part  of  the  chief  magistrate.  "  It  was  desired  of  Mr. 
Higginson  to  draw  up  a  Confession  of  Faith  and  Covenant  in  Scripture 
language;  which  being  done,  was  agreed  upon.  And  because  they 
foresaw,  that  this  wilderness  might  be  looked  upon  as  a  place  of  liberty 
and  therefore  might  in  time  be  troubled  with  erroneous  spirits,  there- 
fore, they  did  put  one  article  into  the  Confession  of  Faith  on  purpose, 
about  the  duty  and  power  of  the  magistrate  in  matters  of  Religion. — 
Thirty  copies  of  the  foresaid  Confession  of  Faith  and  Covenant  being 
written  out  for  the  use  of  thirty  persons,  who  were  to  begin  the  work. 
When  the  sixth  of  August  came,  it  was  kept  as  a  day  of  Fasting  and 
Prayer,  in  which  after  the  Sermons  and  Prayers  of  the  two  ministers, 
in  the  end  of  the  day.  the  foresaid  Confession  of  Faith  and  Covenant 
being  solemnly  read,  the  foresaid  persons  did  solemnly  profess  their 
consent  thereunto.  The  Confession  of  Faith  and  Covenant  forenamed 
was  acknowledged  only  as  a  direction,  pointing  to  the  Faith  and  Covenant 
contained  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and,  therefore,  no  man  was  confined 
unto  that  form  of  words,  but  only  to  the  substance,  end  and  scope  of 


the  matter  contained  in  them."  As  to  "joining  the  church,  some  were 
admitted  by  expressing  their  consent  to  that  written  confession  of 
faith  and  covenant ;  others  did  answer  to  questions  about  the  princi- 
ples of  religion,  that  were  publicly  propounded  to  them,  some  did  pre- 
sent their  confessions  in  writing,  which  was  read  for  them ;  and  some 
that  were  able  and  willing,  did  make  their  confession  in  their  own 
words  and  way."  This  relation  of  Morton  as  explicitly  and  fully  re- 
cognizes a  confession  of  faith  as  it  does  a  covenant.  The  making  of 
the  latter  to  swallow  up  the  former,  as  some  modern  writers  have  done, 
is  a  mistake.  This  is  imitated  by  the  Sketch,  on  page  5,  where  it 
represents  the  covenant  of  1636,  as  comprising  the  first  covenant  and 
confession  of  Faith.     To  such  a  stand  there  arc  several  objections. 

Morton  informs  us,  that  there  was  an  article  in  the  original  confes- 
sion, "  about  the  power  and  duty  of  magistrates  in  religion,"  probably 
suggested  by  the  trouble  with  Lyford  at  Plymouth  and  with  the 
Browns  at  Salem,  which  is  no  where  fouud  in  the  covenant,  last  named, 
though  it  has  one,  promising  obedience  to  ministers  and  magistrates. 
Such  lack  of  conformity  proves,  that  the  Covenant  of  1636,  does  not 
contain,  unless  with  a  marked  omission,  the  confession  of  1629.  It, 
therefore,  breaks  down  the  credibility,  assumed  by  the  Tract  in  behalf 
of  what  it  considers,  as  its  only  remaining  source  of  information,  rela- 
tive to  the  original  confession  and  covenant,  and  thus  opens  a  door  of 
uncertainty  as  to  what  was  the  whole  confession,  while  it  demonstrates 
that  this  instrument  is  not  entirely  included,  even  if  a  possibility  ex- 
isted to  prove  that  it  was  partly,  by  the  covenant  of  1636. 

The  same  author  mentions  a  "form  of  words,"  in  connection  with  the 
confession  and  covenent,  as  a  rule  for  those,  admitted  to  the  church, 
and,  though  the  candidates  were  permitted  to  own  it  by  consent  or  re- 
plies to  questions  or  written  or  oral  language,  they  were  required,  in 
all  this,  to  comply  with  "the  substance,  scope  and  end  of  the  matter 
contained"  in  such  a  form.  Substance  and  its  two  attendant  terms  de- 
pended on  this  form,  as  the  definite  standard  of  the  doctrines,  which 
they  indicate.  They  absolutely  needed  such  a  rule  so  as  not  to  be 
degraded  from  the  vocabulary  of  intelligence  to  that  of  "  sound 
and  nothing  else."  However  the  "form  of  words"  may  have  been 
represented  as  an  empty  shadow,  it  still  remains,  accompanied 
with  its  requisitions,  as  a  fixed  sign  of  all  the  scriptural  principles, 
which  it  originally  signified  in  the  language  of  such  men  as  Francis 
Higginson  and  Samuel  Skelton. 

The  account  of  Morton  has  the  phrase,  "  the  confession  of  faith  and 


8 

covenent  was  acknowledged  only  as  a  direction"  binding  no  man  ex- 
cept to  the  "  substance"  of  such  a  scriptural  form.  This  has  always 
been  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  written  creeds  of  evangelical, 
congregational  churches.  While  requiring  candidates  for  admission  to 
their  privileges  to  harmonize  in  the  substance  of  what  they  deemed 
the  great  doctrines,  taught  by  the  Gospel,  they  have  never  excluded 
any  of  them  for  diversity  of  opinion  in  non-essentials.  So  it  was  with 
the  church,  under  John  Higginson.  He  well  knew  the  common  ac- 
ceptation of  the  word,  direction.  He  published  his  impression  of  it 
several  years  before  he  recommended  the  Memorial,  which  he,  also, 
most  probably  supplied  with  its  facts  about  the  formation  of  his 
church.  He,  as  we  shall  show,  then  used  the  term,  direction,  so  as 
to  comprise  confession  and  covenent  as  two  things,  entirely  separate 
from  each  other. 

An  exegetical  argument  is  offered  by  the  Sketch,  p.  12,  13,  from 
certain  words  in  Morton's  relation,  to  shew  that  confession  of  faith  and 
covenant  were  but  one  instrument,  and  that  "  a  formula  of  faith  distinct 
from  the  covenant  was  a  thing  unheard  of  in  the  formation  of  the  early 
congregational  churches  of  New  England."  We  will  look  at  the  words 
italicised,  on  which  these  propositions  are  predicated.  "  Accordingly 
it  was  desired  of  Mr.  Higginson  to  draw  up  a  confession  of  faith  and 
covenant  which  being  done  ivas  agreed  upon."  The  Sketch  would 
have  us  understand  from  these  words  that  tvas  being  of  the  singular 
number  and  agreeing  with  which,  must  make  this  pronoun  of  the  like 
number,  and  as  which  relates  to  confession  of  faith  and  covenent,  these 
terms  must  signify  but  one  idea  and  this  idea  must  be  covenant.  But 
such  a  mode  of  interpretation  seems  to  be  unnatural  and  forced.  Mur- 
ray, under  his  second  rule  of  Syntax,  remarks  as  follows.  "It  is  evi- 
dently contrary  to  the  first  principles  of  grammar  to  consider  two  distinct 
ideas  as  one,  however  nice  may  be  their  shades  ;  and  if  there  be  no 
difference,  one  of  them  must  be  superfluous  and  ought  to  be  rejected." 
It  is  plain  that  Morton  was  well  acquainted  with  this  principle. — 
Therefore,  when  he  used  confession  of  faith  and  covenant,  two  things 
essentially  different  in  some  particulars,  he  intended  to  convey  by  them 
two  general,  distinct  ideas.  He  needed  not  be  told  that  if  both  signi- 
fied but  one  such  general  idea,  either  confession  of  faith  or  covenant 
should  be  erased.  It  is  also  an  undisputed  rule  and  was  so  when 
Morton  wrote,  that  "two  nouns  in  the  singular  number,  joined  together 
by  a  copulative  conjunction  must  have  a  pronoun  agreeing  with  them  in 
the  plural  number."     Consequently,   the  which,  if  relating  to  confes- 


'J 

sion  of  faith  and  covenant,  must  be  plural,  and,  of  course,  must  Lave 
its  verb  of  the  same  number. 

Therefore,  one  of  two  inferences  follows,  either  that  was,  if  agreeing 
with  which,  as  the  relative  to  confession  of  faith  and  covenant,  should  ^*e~- 
be  corrected  and  made  were,  and  thus  does  not  sanction  the  conclusion 
of  the  Tract,  or,  if  not  agreeing  with  which,  so  applied,  must  properly 
agree  with  it  differently  applied.  The  last  of  this  dilemma  is  evidently 
the  fact.  To  substantiate  this  proposition,  the  ensuing  remarks  are 
presented  It  is  well  known,  that  part  of  a  sentence,  logically  consid- 
ered, may  have  all  the  privileges  of  Syntax,  which  belong  to  a  noun  of 
multitude.  One  example  is  given  from  Murray,  "Promising  without 
due  consideration  often  produces  a  breach  of  promise."  Consequently, 
part  of  a  sentence  is  entitled,  like  such  noun,  to  a  relative  of  the  singu- 
lar number.  Applying  these  statements,  let  us  take  the  phrase,  "It 
was  desired  of  Mr.  Higginsou  to  draw  up  a  confession  of  faith  and 
covenant  in  Scripture  language."  The  action  here  is  evidently  the 
draft  of  a  confession  of  faith  and  covenant.  It  is  the  gist  of  the  sen- 
tence, and  that  portion  of  it,  which  may  be  properly  considered  as  a 
noun,  significant  of  more  than  one  distinct  thing,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  entitled  to  a  relative  pronoun  of  the  singular  number.  Of  course, 
which,  referring  to  such  a  portion  of  the  sentence,  may  properly  have 
the  verb,  was,  agreeing  with  it  and  still  leave  confession  of  faith  and 
covenant  two  separate  instruments.  So  it  is  with  the  second  case,  of- 
fered by  the  Sketch.  "  The  confession  of  faith  and  covenant  foremen- 
tioned  was  acknowledged  only  as  a  direction."  The  part  of  this  sen- 
tence to  forcmentioned,  was  intended  by  Morton  as  a  nominative  singu- 
lar, though  of  plural  signification,  to  ivas,  so  that  confession  of  faith 
and  covenant  should  not  be  merged  together,  but  understood  as  our 
fathers  defined  them.  But  does  the  Sketch  object  to  such  construing 
a  part  of  a  sentence  ?  If  so,  it  falls  under  its  own  objection,  though 
it  has  come  to  a  different  conclusion.  It  has  rendered  the  phrase, 
"  the  confession  of  faith,"  indubitably  a  part  of  the  sentence,  as  a  noun 
singular  and  has  added  covenant  to  it  and  still  retained  the  whole  as 
of  the  same  number.  It  would  be  far  more  suitable  to  the  genius  of 
our  language  to  understand  the  passages  in  question,  as  follows: — Con- 
fession or  avowal  of  faith  and  of  covenant, — so  that  was  might  agree 
with  which  as  referring  to  confession  or  avowal,  and  in  the  next  case, 
immediately  with  one  or  other  of  these  last  two  words, — than  to  adopt 
the  interpretation  of  the  Sketch. 

Another  expression,  "that  written  confession  of  faith  and  covenant," 
is  indicated  by  the  Sketch  to  signify  but  one  instrument,  because  that, 
2 


10 

being  a  singular  demonstrative  pronoun,  and  not  repeated  immediately 
before  the  word,  covenant,  makes  this  instrument  of  the  same  import  as 
confession  of  faith.  This  is  not  justified  by  the  use  of  our  language, 
nor  was  it  in  the  days  of  Morton.  "We  frequently  meet,  in  ancient  as 
well  as  in  modern  publications,  with  phrases  tantamount  to  the  following : 
That  man  and  woman  were  strangers  to  each  other.  Here  are  two  indi- 
viduals of  distinct  identity,  the  latter  having  an  ellipsis  of  that  before 
her  understood.  If  allowing  the  Sketch  to  be  right,  we  are  reduced  to 
the  absurdity  of  declaring  that  these  two  persons  ai-e  one  and  the  same. 
But  this  cannot  be  in  the  nature  of  things. 

The  preceding  exegetical  remarks  leave  us  no  other  alternative,  than 
either  to  trample  on  the  proprieties  of  our  language  by  complying  with 
deductions  from  them,  as  drawn  by  the  Sketch,  or  to  coincide  with 
such  proprieties,  and  thus  permit  confession  of  faith  and  covenant  to 
signify,  as  originally  intended,  the  avowal  of  Gospel  doctrines  and  of 
agreement  to  serve  God  in  all  relative  duties,  as  two  distinct  services. 

From  Morton  we  pass  to  the  Covenant  of  1G36.  If  this  instrument 
be  said  to  comprise  what  the  founders  of  Xaumkeag  church  called 
a  confession  of  faith,  have  we  not  a  right  to  expect,  that  it  will  present 
us  with  the  leading  features  of  such  a  confession.  If  a  contract  to 
keep  the  laws  of  our  Commonwealth  be  represented  as  containing  these 
laws,  are  we  not  fully  authorized  to  look  for  them  in  such  a  contract  ? 
Most  assuredly.  But  we  search  that  covenant  in  vain,  for  most  of  the 
religious  principles  which  the  founders  of  Salem  heartily  believed  and 
counted  above  all  earthly  price  ;  and  the  small  proportion  of  them 
found  there,  are  only  by  implication,  such  as  tally  with  the  form  of  a 
covenant,  but  not  with  the  form  of  a  confession.  We  fully  believe, 
that  had  those  worthies  known  that  the  covenant  of  1G3G  was  to  be 
expounded  as  embracing  the  principles  of  their  creed,  they  would  have 
strongly  protested  against  it  as  a  grievous  wrong  to  their  reputation 
as  Christian  Puritans. 

The  Magnalia,  while  introducing  the  Covenant  of  10^6,  vol.  i.,  p. 
G6,  ed.  1820,  thus  expresses  itself.  "  They  set  apart  the  sixth  day 
of  August,  for  settling  a  Church  state  among  them,  and  for  their 
making  a  confession  of  their  faith  and  entering  into  an  holy  covenant, 
whereby  that  Church  state  was  formed."  This  language  is  very 
noticeable  as  to  its  plain  import,  that  two  distinct  writings  were  in 
the  mind  of  the  author.  Had  there  been  only  one,  he  could  not  have 
used  words  more  directly  and  efficiently  calculated  to  make  a  false 
impression  on  every  reader  of  them. 

The  relation  goes  on:   "  Now  the  Covenant,  whereto  these  Christians 


11 

engaged  themselves,  which  was  about  seven  years  after  solemnly  re- 
newed among  them,  1  shall  lay  before  all  the  churches  of  God,  as  it 
was  then  expressed  and  inforccd."  Here  the  question  arises,  to  what 
date  docs  this  word,  then,  refer  ?  It  more  naturally  and  easily  refers 
to  L636,  when  the  renewal  took  place,  than  otherwise.  Consequently, 
in  giving  the  transcript,  Blather  intended  to  be  understood,  as  not 
confining  it  to  the  exact  phraseology  and  contents  of  the  first  covenant. 

Having  recited  the  covenant,  as  the  same  author  sets  it  before  us, 
he  adds  :  "  By  this  instrument  was  the  covenant  of  grace  explained, 
received  and  recognized  by  the  First  Church  in  this  Colony."  Nor 
until  he  comes  to  describe  the  admission  of  members  to  the  church, 
does  he  speak  a  single  syllable  about  Confession.  He  thus  refers  to 
this  and  that,  as  two  entirely  separate  concerns.  Nor  when  the 
Church  renewed  their  covenant,  in  1636,  did  they  so  much  as  utter  a 
lisp  in  their  introduction  to  it,  as  though  containing  the  least  particle 
of  their  confession,  but  mentioned  it  as  being  nothing  more  than  a 
covenant. 

In  1G3G,  when  the  Salem  covenant  was  renewed,  we  have  the  subse- 
quent extract  from  the  Boston  Church  records.  "  Thomas  Matson, 
formerly  received  by  communion  of  churches,  but  now  as  a  member 
upon  confession  of  his  faith  and  repentance,  and  professed  subjection 
to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  according  to  the  covenant  of  the  Gospel." 
Here  confession  of  faith  and  covenant  subjection  were  undoubtedly 
required  as  separate  duties.  From  the  fellowship  between  Boston  and 
Salem  churches  we  may  legitimately  conclude,  that  the  like  custom 
was  in  the  latter  as  in  the  former. 

In  1637  many  Puritan  clergyman  of  England  sent  over  thirty-two 
questions  to  the  ministers  of  New  England.  Under  the  eighth  ques- 
tion, they  make  the  two  subsequent  inquiries.  Do  you  require  of 
those  joining  the  church,  "  a  public  profession  of  their  faith  concerning 
the  articles  of  Pieligion  ?  An  express  verbal  covenanting  to  walk 
with  the  said  church  in  particular,  in  church  fellowship  ?"  Two  years 
afterwards,  these  questions  were  answered  by  the  ministers  of  our  New 
England  Colonies,  through  Richard  Mather.  They  say,  we  hear  can- 
didates for  admission  to  the  church  "  speak  concerning  the  gift  and 
grace  of  justifying  faith  in  their  souls,  and  the  manner  of  God  with 
them  in  working  it  in  their  hearts  ;  we  hear  them  speak  what  they  do 
believe  concerning  the  doctrine  of  faith.  Hereby  we  would  prevent 
the  creeping  in  of  any  into  the  church,  that  may  be  infected  with  cor- 
rupt opinions  ;  "  having  done  this  and  being  approved,  they  "  openly 
profess  their  subjection  to  the  Gospel  of  Christ,   and  to  all  the  ordi- 


12 

nances  of  God  in  that  church  "  with  which  they  unite.  We  have  here 
a  plain  indication  and  expression  of  what  was  done  in  Salem  and  the 
other  churches  of  Massachusetts  and  vicinity. 

Any  person  may  as  rationally  deny  that  da}-  is  not  different  from 
night,  as  to  affirm,  with  such  facts  before  him,  compared  with  pro- 
ceedings in  the  formation  of  the  First  Salem  Church,  that  this  church 
had  no  primitive  articles  of  belief,  required  of  its  candidates  for  ad- 
mission, separate  from  its  covenant,  as  expressed  in  163(5. 

As  a  matter  of  past  practice  and  public  notoriety,  Lechford  in  his 
"News  from  New  England,"  under  1039,  but  three  years  after  the 
Covenant  of  1630,  described  the  manner  of  admitting  members  to  our 
churches.  Testimonials  and  recommendations  were  required  of  them. 
They  related  their  Christian  experience.  "  The  party  having  finished 
his  discourses  of  his  confession  and  profession  of  his  faith,"  the  Kuling 
Elder  then  called  the  brethren  to  vote  whether  they  felt  read  y  to 
accept  him  as  a  member.  So  it  was  with  other  candidates.  In  case 
they  were  approved  of,  "  the  Elder  calleth  them  and  rehearseth  the 
covenant,  on  their  parts,  to  them,  which  they  publicly  say,  they  do 
promise,  by  the  help  of  God,  to  perform.  And  then  the  Elder,  in  the 
name  of  the  Church,  promiseth  the  Churches  part  of  the  covenant,  to 
the  new  admitted  members." 

Thomas  Weld  replied  to  William  Eathband  in  1644.  The  latter 
had  remarked  of  our  fathers,  "  They  permit  no  man  whatsoever  to  be 
a  member  in  any  of  their  churches,  to  partake  with  them  in  any 
church  fellowship,  unless  he  exactly  enter  in  their  way  of  entering, 
and  walk  in  their  order."  The  former  answered,  "  It  is  no  more  than 
all  other  societies  in  the  world  do,  who  first  require  conformity  before 
they  permit  to  any  the  enjoyment  of  their  liberties."  Eathband  re- 
lated the  procedure  of  our  churches  with  candidates  for  admission, 
before  entering  into  covenant,  which  then,  as  now,  was  the  last  requi- 
sition. He  said  that  such  candidates  must  have  recommendation  from 
acquaintances,  present  and  absent ;  give  a  particular  relation  of  their 
religious  experience,  and  be  examined  "  touching  their  knowledge  in 
the  principles  of  religion."  In  connection  with  this  he  quoted  a  letter 
from  this  country:  "The  churches  here  admit  none  but  upon  confes- 
sion of  their  faith."  His  language  was  understood  by  Weld  as  if 
every  individual  candidate  was  required  to  do  all  these  things  in  pub- 
lic, and  therefore  Weld  mentioned  an  exception  :  "  We  have  seen  such 
a  tender  respect  had  to  the  weaker  sex,  who  are  usually  more  fearful 
and  bashful,  that  we  commit  their  trial  to  the  elders  and  some  few 
others,  in  private,  who  upon  their  testimony,  are  admitted  into  the 
church." 


1o 
O 

Etathband,  after  dwelling  on  the  qualifications  of  church  member- 
ship, and  making  one  of  them  to  be  confession  of  faith,  as  absolutely 
essential,  came  down  to  the  covenant,  which  he  represented  as  the 
same  in  exacting  duties  of  fellowship,  but  "  in  form  of  words,  diverse 
in  divers  churches."  In  replying  to  him,  Weld  observed,  "  Any 
church  hath  and  taketh  liberty,  as  they  shall  see  just  cause  to  alter  it 
(their  covenant)  and  renew  it  before  the  Lord,  and  bind  not  themselves 
to  continue  in  any  oversight  because  they  once  fell  into  it,  and  some 
churches  ha  v  so  done." 

Cotton,  in  his  "  Way  of  the  Churches"  in  New  England  of  1045, 
made  the  following  statements.  They  who  wish  to  join  the  church, 
mention  it  to  the  elders,  "  who  take  trial  of  their  knowledge  in  the 
principles  of  religion,  and  of  their  experience  in  the  ways  of  grace,  and 
of  their  godly  conversation  amongst  men,  that  if  found  ignorant,  such 
may  not  be  presently  presented  to  the  church."  If  approved,  "  they 
are  propounded  by  one  of  the  ruling  elders  of  the  church."  If  no 
exceptions  be  made,  they  are  called  forth  before  the  church,  and  each 
one  maketh  confession  of  his  sins  and  profession  of  his  faith."  Pro- 
vided all  appears  right,  the  brethren  express  their  approbation  by  lift- 
ing up  their  hands.  After  this,  "  the  elder  propoundeth  to  them  the 
heads  of  the  covenant."  The  candidates  "  acknowledging  this  to  be 
their  duty  and  professing  their  consent  unto  it,  in  the  name  of  Christ ; 
the  elder  doth  further  accpiaint  them  with  what  duties  of  holy  watch- 
fulness over  them,  they  may  expect  from  the  church  ;  and  so  shutteth 
up  his  work  with  some  short  prayer  unto  the  Lord."  Cotton  remarked, 
"  The  Lord  Jesus  maketh  the  profession  of  the  faith  of  his  name  to  be 
the  rock,  on  which  his  visible  church  is  built.  Then  we  shall  build  a 
church  without  a  foundation,  if  we  receive  such  members,  as  do  not 
hold  forth  such  a  profession.  Doth  not  Christ  impute  it  to  the  sleepi- 
ness, that  is,  to  the  remissness  and  negligence,  of  his  servants,  that 
tares  were  sown  in  his  field  amongst  the  wheat?" 

Cotton  said,  in  his  "  Way  of  Congregational  churches  cleared," 
printed  in  London,  1648,  "  We  profess  the  Orthodox  doctrine  of  faith, 
the  same  with  all  Protestant  churches." 

As  bearing  on  the  like  subject,  and  affording  similar  proof,  we  may 
quote  from  the  preface  to  the  Platform,  adopted  by  the  New  England 
Synod  of  1648.  "  Being  called  upon  by  our  godly  magistrates  to  draw 
up  a  public  confession  of  faith,  which  is  constantly  taught  and  gene- 
rally professed  amongst  us  ;  we  thought  good  to  present  unto  them, 
and  with  them  to  our  churches,  and  with  them  to  all  the  churches  of 
Christ  abroad,  our  professed  and  hearty  assent  and  attestation  to  the 


u 

whole  confession  of  faith  (for  substance  of  doctrine)  which  the  reverend 
Assembly  presented  to  the  religious  and  honorable  Parliament  of 
England." 

In  his  epistle,  dedicatory  to  his  Orthodox  Evangelist,  which  he  wrote 
to  his  parishioners  of  Ipswich,  1652,  John  Norton  made  the  following  re- 
marks :  "  What  hath  my  soul  longed  or  labored  for  more  than  that  you 
should  be  not  only  babes,  but  men,  both  sound  and  strong  in  faith;  sin- 
cere and  distinct,  that  Christ  might  not  only  be  formed  but  perfected  ; 
that  you  might  not  only  have  a  saving  but  satisfactory  knowledge  of 
him,  in  whom  you  believe.  The  end  of  the  Gospel  is  to  be  known,  the 
duty  and  disposition  of  the  believer,  is  to  know."  How  he  had  thus  dis- 
charged his  duty  to  the  people  of  Ipswich  from  1036,  may  be  learned 
from  the  principles  of  divinity  taught  and  illustrated  in  the  aforesaid 
work. 

In  his  election  sermon  of  1 663,  John  Higginson  observed  that  the 
design  of  the  primitive  settlers  was  "  the  avoiding  of  some  special  cor- 
ruptions, and  the  vigorous  profession  and  practice  of  everything  in 
doctrines,  worship  and  discipline,  according  to  Scripture  pattern." — 
After  other  similar  observations,  he  added,  "Hence  I  humbly  conceive, 
that  the  consent  of  the  Synod  here  to  the  confession  of  Faith  by  the 
Assembly  of  Westminster,  and  the  platform  of  discipline  published  in 
the  year  1649,  these  for  the  substance  of  them,  have  carried  with 
them  a  declaration  of  the  Faith  and  order  of  these  churches,  and  are 
so  looked  upon  by  the  reformed  Churches  abroad,  unto  which  may  be 
added  many  other  books  of  our  divines  of  the  same  import." 

William  Stoughton,  in  his  sermon  of  1670,  called  "  New  England's 
true  interest,"  spoke  of  what  its  founders  practiced,  as  "  practical  piety 
and  holiness  ;  unmixed,  spiritual,  Gospel  worship ;  sincere  and  open 
profession  and  owning  of  the  truths  and  ways  of  Christ."  In  his  ad- 
dress to  survivors  of  the  first  generation,  he  observed,  "  as  long  as  you 
are  in  this  tabernacle,  stir  them  up  by  putting  them  in  remembrance, 
that  they  may  be  established  in  all  those  truths  and  practices,  which 
to  own  and  abide  in  hath  been  New  England's  glory  and  must  be  its 
preservation  and  safety  in  whatever  times  are  coming  upon  us." 

In  the  preface  to  the  Eesult  of  the  Synod,  assembled  in  Boston  1679, 
and  written  by  Increase  Mather,  he  remarked,  that  the  churches  "own 
both  the  faith  and  order  of  the  Gospel,  that  was  professed  in  the 
days  of  our  fathers."  As  the  same  divine  wrote  the  Eesult,  he  shows 
therein  what  he  meant  by  such  owning  of  the  faith,  as  follows,  "  It  is 
requisite  that  persons  be  not  admitted  unto  communion  in  the  Lord's 


15 

supper  without  making  a  personal  and  public  profession  of  their  faith 
and  repentance."  He  afterwards  spoke  of  renewing  the  covenant  as  a 
long. known  custom,  very  distinct  from  the  profession  or  confession  of 
faith. 

As  to  the  manner  in  which  the  Salem  church  was  gathered,  Hub- 
bard wrote,  by  1682,  "  Mr.  Higginson  drew  up  a  confession  of  faith  and 
form  of  a  church  covenant, "  language  which  must  be  exceedingly  di- 
verted from  its  natural  import  to  signify  but  one  solitary  document. 

We  have  thus  followed  the  teachings  of  history.  Ihey  evidently  and 
fully  show,  that  there  was  a  marked  distinction  made  in  the 
Salem  and  other  primitive  churches,  between  a  profession  or 
confession  of  faith  and  taking  the  covenant,  and  that  these  were  ser- 
vices not  mixed  up  together,  but  required  and  performed  at  different 
times.  But  in  the  covenant,  renewed  in  1636,  we  perceive  no  pro- 
vision of  doctrines  to  meet  such  an  established  practice,  and  therefore, 
we  cannot,  consistently  with  the  ecclesiastical  usage  of  our  first  settlers, 
allow,  that  it  comprises  a  confession  of  faith  in  addition  to  its  own  ap- 
propriate requisitions.  Such  historical  instructions  are  absolutely  at 
variance  with  the  Sketch,  which  maintains  that  the  confession  and 
covenant  "  wei'e  one  and  the  same  instrument."  Applying  them 
to  the  Book,  do  they  contradict  its  statements,  as  called  in  question 
by  this  Tract  ?  Candor  and  truth  legitimately  exercised,  cannot  re- 
ply in  the  affirmative. 

III.  Proceedings  of  the  First  Salem  Church.  The  records  of  this 
body,  as  they  are  now  extant,  have  quotations  from  a  preceding  book, 
not  to  be  found,  from  1636  to  1659.  There  is  no  original  transcript 
of  the  first  confession  and  covenant  known  to  be  in  existence.  Even 
the  list  of  the  church  members  has  no  earlier  a  date,  than  the  former 
of  these  two  years,  before  any  of  them,  though  some  were  among  the 
first  professors.  Of  the  thirty  names,  cited  on  11th  page  of  the  Sketch, 
but  a  small  proportion  were  of  the  primitive  members.  The  earliest 
ecclesiastical  document  of  the  present  records  is  what  the  Magnalia 
contains  and  calls  the  covenant,  as  renewed  in  1636,  except  an  intro- 
duction to  it  of  this  date  and  an  additional  clause  of  1660. — 
Consequently,  the  present  church  records  cannot  furnish  uudoubted 
and  full  proof  of  what  the  founders  of  Salem  had  exactly  for  their 
original  confession  and  covenant.  They  have  not  a  single  item  to 
substantiate  the  position,  that  the  latter  of  these  documents  embraced 
the  former.  The  introduction  to  the  covenant,  which  they  have, 
says,  "  We  renew  that  church  covenant,  we  find  this  Church  bound  unto 


16 

at  their  first  beginning."  It  utters  not  a  syllable  in  reference  to  the 
confession.  The  principal  word,  on  which  the  question  turns,  inde- 
pendently of  other  sources,  whether  this  covenant  is  the  same  as  the 
first,  "word  for  word  and  letter  for  letter,"  is  renew.  This  terra  evident- 
ly means,  from  its  connection,  "  to  put  again  into  act.''  Therefore,  the 
renewal  of  the  covenant  was  for  the  members  to  repeat  the  act,  it  re- 
quired, of  obligating  themselves  to  serve  God  faithfully  in  all  their 
personal  and  relative  duties.  This  could  then  and  on  all  similar  occa- 
sions afterwards,  be  properly  done,  and  yet  leave  room  for  such 
omissions,  alterations  and  additions  in  the  covenant,  as  comported  with 
so  sacred  a  duty  and  as  were  expedient  for  different  periods,  events 
and  circumstances.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  statement  of  Mr.  Weld 
on  p.  13.  Hence,  the  brethren  in  1636,  virtually  said,  we  do  renew 
the  original  covenant,  or  repeat  the  act  of  binding  ourselves  to  do 
the  good  pleasure  of  God  in  all  our  relations,  as  that  covenant  obligated 
its  primitive  observers.  Their  renewal  did  not  hold  them  to  perpetu- 
ate and  approve  every  letter,  word  and  sentence  of  such  a  document, 
any  further  than  they  agreed  it  should  in  compliance  with  their  differ- 
ent situation,  though,  at  the  same  time,  it  did  hold  them  to  the  moral 
obligation,  as  already  expressed.  It  is  similar  to  the  repairing  or  re- 
newing of  Church  edifices.  These  may  be  centuries  old  and  }'et,  while 
allowed  to  stand  as  the  resorts  of  holy  service,  we  always  assigu  to 
them  their  ancient  age,  though  they  may  have  been  altered  in  form  and 
enlarged  in  dimensions,  with  every  successive  assembly,  who  have  wor- 
shipped within  their  walls,  It  is  like  the  corporate  identity  of  a 
chui'ch  composed  of  members,  who  die  off  for  generations,  but  it  is  still 
traced  to  its  original  formation  and  receives  its  primitive  rank  according- 
ly. Or,  to  take  things  less  material,  it  resembles  a  law  or  constitution 
of  a  State,  which  until  absolutely  repealed,  bear  their  original  dates, 
though  when  amended  or  renewed,  they  have  been  subjected  to  various 
changes.  The  ground,  here  taken,  will  be  confirmed  by  subsequent 
facts. 

On  one  side  of  the  covenant,  as  recited  by  Mather,  and  contained  in 
the  church  records,  whence  this  author  received  it  directly  or  indi- 
rectly, is  the  succeeding  marginal  note,  penned  by  Samuel  Eisk,  who 
was  ordained  in  1718.  "  6  of  6th  month,  1629.  This  covenant  was 
publicly  signed  and  declared,  as  may  appear  from  page  85,  in  this 
book."  The  instrument,  thus  noticed,  has  an  introduction  and  an 
addition,  which  could  not  possibly  have  been  with  the  covenant,  as 
owned  in  the  beginning.     Therefore,   Mr.  Fisk's  written   testimony 


17 

adds  force  to  the  position,  that  it  was  common  to  speak  of  such  a  con- 
tract, as  the  first  one,  though  preceded  and  succeeded  by  what  was 
not  of  its  primitive  contents. 

But  the  note  of  Mr.  risk  is  particularly  interesting  from  its  refer- 
ence to  the  85th  page.  Here  we  arc  met  with  the  following  transcript. 
1665,  Oct.  5.  "  The  Pastor  did  then  also  acquaint  the  Church  with  the 
writing  he  had  formerly  mentioned  and  read  unto  them,  as  a  help  to 
reduce  the  doctrine  of  the  Synod  into  practice,  it  being  a  Direction  for 
a  public  profession  after  private  examination  by  the  Elders,  which 
Direction  is  taken  out  of  the  Scripture,  and  points  to  the  Faith  and 
Covenant  contained  in  the  Scripture,  it  being  the  same  for  substance 
propounded  to  and  agreed  upon  by  the  Church  of  Salem  at  their  first 
beginning,  the  sixth  of  the  sixth  month,  1G29.  it  being  now  printed, 
any  that  desired  it.  should  have  one  of  them  for  their  use."  Here  we 
have  a  rare  production  from  the  pen  of  John  Higginson,  introduced 
to  our  notice.  It  refers  to  a  Synod  of  Massachusetts  of  16G2.  This 
body  are  well  known  to  have  assembled,  and  acted  on  the  half-way 
covenant  and  the  consociation  of  churches.  Their  churches  still  re- 
tained the  articles  of  faith,  professed  by  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
and  adopted  by  them  in  1648,  as  the  standard  for  admission  to  their 
fellowship.  In  their  answer  to  questions,  as  desired  by  the  General 
Court,  they  observed,  that  "  such  church  members,  who  are  admitted 
in  minority,  understanding  the  doctrine  of  faith,  and  publicly  pro- 
fessing their  assent  thereunto,  not  scandalous  in  life,  and  solemnly 
owning  the  covenant  before  the  church,"  may  have  their  children  bap- 
tized. Here  the  Synod,  whose  proposals  Mr.  Higginson  wished  to 
have  carried  out  among  his  people,  as  others  of  like  tenor  had  been 
from  the  beginning,  as  his  declaration  is  on  p.  14,  made  it  necessary 
even  for  such  as  owned  the  half-way  covenant,  to  comprehend  "  the 
doctrine  of  faith,"  as  evidently  taught  by  the  Westminster  Catechism, 
and  publicly  acknowledge  it,  and  then  to  own  such  a  covenant,  so  that 
they  might  be  received  into  membership,  though  not  full  communion. 
If  so  much  was  demanded  of  these  persons,  assuredly  less  could  not 
consistently  have  been  from  those  admitted  to  fuller  privileges.  Here 
two  things  are  demonstrated.  One,  that  articles  of  religion  were  first  re- 
quired to  be  publicly  confessed,  and  another,  that  a  covenant  was  after- 
wards alike  acknowledged  as  conditions  of  communion,  and,  of  course, 
the  former  and  latter  of  the  two  first  of  these  duties  were  not  dis- 
charged together,  but  separately. 

In  the  same  extract  from  the  85th  page  of  the  Church  records,  we 
3 


18 

read,  "  Faith  and  Covenant."  This  phrase  was  used  by  Mr.  Higgin- 
son.  He  did  not  mean  by  it,  as  proved  by  his  Direction,  that  Faith 
and  Covenant  were  one  and  the  same,  but  two  instruments  entirely 
separate.  His  signification  of  it  was  conclusive  authority,  as  pre- 
viously stated,  for  Morton's  Memorial,  recommended  by  Higginson 
four  years  after  the  latter  published  such  a  phrase.  What  shall  we 
say,  then,  of  the  interpretation  put  by  the  action  of  the  Synod  and 
Mr.  Higginson,  upon  the  expression,  "  Faith  and  Covenant  "  ?  Such 
interpretation  was  laid  before  the  whole  country  prior  to  the  emission 
of  the  Memorial,  which  is  not  only  destitute  of  any  conclusive  argu- 
ment against  it,  but  furnishes  positive  material  in  its  favor.  Most 
certainly,  it  is  point  blank  against  the  conclusions  of  the  Sketch. 

Here  the  question  offers  itself,  "What  does  the  Direction,*  carefully, 
earnestly  and  sincerely  urged  by  the  pastor  on  his  church, — contain  ? 
After  various  and  appropriate  quotations  from  the  Bible,  one  of  them 
being,  "  Hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words,"  it  presents  a  Confession 
of  Faith,  which  begins  and  proceeds  in  the  following  language : 

"  I  do  believe  with  my  heart,  and  confess  with  my  mouth,  concern, 
ing  God,  that  there  is  but  one  only  true  God  in  three  persons,  the 
Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost ;  each  of  them  God,  and  all  of 
them  one  and  the  same  infinite,  eternal  God,  most  wise,  holy,  just, 
merciful  and  blessed  forever." 

Then  the  Confession  goes  on  with  similar  particularity,  as  to  six 
other  subjects,  namely :  The  Works  of  God ;  The  Fall  of  Man  ;  Jesus 
Christ ;  The  Holy  Ghost ;  Benefits  through  Christ ;  and  the  Christian 
Church.  After  setting  before  us  these  things,  the  Direction  narrates 
the  Covenant,  much  shorter  than  that  drawn  up  by  Teters,  and  then, 
"  Questions  to  be  answered  at  the  baptizing  of  children." 

Such  a  direction  was  no  hasty  effusion.  It  was  from  the  mind, 
heart  and  hand  of  Higginson,  who  well  knew  what  he  affirmed.  He 
had  personal  experience  of  all  he  declared  on  this  subject.  He  was 
the  original  source  of  all  the  authority  adduced  by  the  Sketch,  to  sus- 
tain a  theory  totally  at  variance  with  his  own.  He  was  among  the 
survivors,  of  whom  Hubbard  said,  while  describing,  among  other 
things,  a  transcript  of  the  primitive  confession  and  covenant,  "  a  copy 
of  which  is  retained  at  this  day  by  some,  that  succeeded  in  the  same 
church."  Higginson,  in  preparing  the  Direction,  would  be  much  more 
likely  to  imitate  the  main  features  of  what  his  father  drew  up,  than 
those  by  any  other  hand.     Under  these  circumstances,  he  declared, 

*  See  Appendix  (A.) 


19 

that  the  Direction  was  "  the  same  for  substauce  "  as  agreed  upon  by 
the  Church  in  1G29.  Compare  it  with  the  Covenant  of  163G.  "We 
cannot,  if  permitting  reason  to  make  a  fit  use  of  the  testimony  before 
us,  do  otherwise  than  conclude,  that  there  is  an  incontrovertible  differ- 
ence between  them  ;  that  if  Higginson  be  correct,  they  are  far  from 
being  one  and  the  same  thing ;  that  the  covenant  of  the  Direction  has 
but  little  resemblance  to  the  covenant  accepted  by  the  church  under 
Peters ;  that  this  last  instrument  by  no  means  comprises  the  confes- 
sion of  the  Direction  ;  and  that,  as  the  confession  and  covenant  of  the 
Direction  are  substantially  those  of  1629,  these  two  original  instru- 
ments cannot,  with  any  propriety  of  sound  speech,  be  called  the  same 
as  the  covenant  of  1636. 

"We  will  now  turn  to  the  proceedings  of  the  church  in  1680.  This 
year  another  pamphlet*  was  prepared  for  their  use.  It  is  plainly 
from  the  hand  of  John  Higginson,  ever  vigilant  for  the  prosperity  of 
his  flock.  It  commences  with  the  two  succeeding  statements.  "  There 
was  a  church  covenant  agreed  upon  and  consented  to  by  the  church  of 
Salem  at  their  first  beginning  in  the  year  1629,  Aug.  6." — "  This  fol- 
lowing covenant  was  propounded  by  the  Pastor,  agreed  upon  and  con- 
sented to  by  the  Brethren  of  the  Church  in  the  year  1636."  Then 
the  latter  covenant,  with  its  introduction,  is  recited  literally,  as  it  was 
inserted,  without  such  introduction,  in  Cotton  Mather's  Magnalia,  a 
work  recommended  by  Higginson  seventeen  years  from  the  date  of  the 
pamphlet.  There  is  not  so  much  as  an  allusion  either  to  the  first  or 
last  of  these  two  instruments  as  including  a  confession  of  faith,  nor  is 
the  word  confession  used  in  any  connection  with  them.  The  whole 
phraseology  shows,  that  covenants  alone  were  before  the  mind  of  him, 
who  spoke  of  them.  Such  a  fact  is  no  proof  that  there  was  not  a  dis- 
tinct confession,  because  the  pamphlet  of  1665  and  other  credible 
authorities  have  placed  this  question  beyond  all  rational  dispute. 
This  conclusion  is  strengthened  by  the  quotation  of  the  Sketch,  pp.  7, 
8,  as  to  individuals  who  joined  the  church  in  1678,  "  they  making 
their  profession  of  faith  and  repentance,"  and  were  then  admitted, 
"  they  engaging  in  the  covenant."  Nor  has  the  mode  of  such  pro- 
fession or  confession,  as  related  by  the  quotation,  any  essential  force 
to  break  down  the  position,  that  the  church  had  "  a  form  of  words," 
as  Morton  relates,  to  regulate  the  confession  so  that  it  should  not 
deny  the  leading  principles  of  the  Gospel,  as  understood  and  declared 
by  John  Higginson  and  his  brethren. 

*  See  Appendix  (B.^ 


20 

The  pamphlet  next  remarks,  "  This  forementioned  covenant  (of 
1636)  was  often  read  and  renewed  by  the  church  at  the  end  of  days 
of  humiliation,  especially  in  the  year  1660,"  when  a  clause  was  added, 
"  to  beware  of  the  leaven  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Quakers."  It  then 
informs  us,  that  the  church  adopt  another  covenant,  "  as  a  direction 
for  the  renewing  of  our  church  covenant,"  which  was  first  used  April 
15,  16S0.  Such  a  covenant  varies  much  from  that  of  1636,  and,  of 
course,  the  first  time  it  was  used,  it  could  not  be  a  renewal  of  its  pre- 
ceding covenant  in  all  its  words  and  sentences,  but  only  of  the  moral 
obligation  of  the  members  to  serve  God  in  all  their  relations,  and  of 
the  language  and  parts  of  this  preceding  covenant  as  were  needed  to 
express  such  an  obligation.  Therefore  we  have  another  confirmation, 
that  the  renewal  of  the  covenant  in  1636,  did  not  necessarily  imply, 
that  such  an  instrument  was  the  same  in  all  respects  as  that  of  1629, 
This  conclusion  is  confirmed  by  the  phraseology  of  the  two  foregoing- 
statements,  compared  with  each  other,  which  fully  indicate  all  the 
diversity  here  implied. 

The  Statements  and  the  Direction,  as  illustrating  each  other  and 
the  confessions  of  faith  and  covenants,  appertaining  to  the  First 
Church  of  Salem,  constitute  an  indubitable  argument,  sufficient  to 
confirm  the  positions  of  the  Volume,  and  clear  it  from  the  charges  of 
the  Sketch. 

Before  we  close,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  notice  the  implied  surprise 
of  the  Tract,  pp.  5,  6,  that  the  volume  failed  to  recite,  at  length,  the 
covenant  of  1636.  But,  in  view  of  the  previous  reasons,  why  such 
an  instrument  should  not  be  quoted  by  a  historical  work,  as  "  the 
true  original  of  the  confession  and  covenant  of  1629,"  there  can  be  no 
Teasonable  wonder  why  it  was  omitted.  The  manner  in  which  such 
surprise  is  manifested  seems  to  denote  that  every  history  of  New  Eng- 
land, down  to  the  time  of  Dr.  Bentley's  remarks,  contained  a  trans- 
script  of  this  instrument.  If  recollecting  aright,  no  other  history  of 
our  country  contained  it  except  the  Magnalia,  and  this  in  terms  by  no 
means  sufficient  to  allow  the  latitude  taken  with  it  by  the  Sketch.  It 
is  true,  that  the  covenant  of  1  636  was  quoted  by  William  Bathband 
in  his  work  of  1644,  with  another,  adopted  by  the  Church  of  Botter- 
dam,  when  Hugh  Beters  became  their  pastor  and  before  his  settle- 
ment at  Salem.  As  recited  by  Hanbury,  these  two  documents  exhibit 
a  style  and  similar  expressions  which  denote  that  they  may  have  been 
drawn  up  by  Beters  himself.  Whether  this  be  so  or  not,  Bathband 
adduces  the  Salem  covenant  of  1636,  without  a  single  intimation  that 


21 

it  was  the  one  of  1629.  He  criticizes  some  of  its  passages,  as  to 
prophecy  and  questions  in  time  of  public  worship,  which  were  not  so 
likely  to  exist  in  the  church  at  the  time  of  its  being  formed  as  after- 
wards, and  thus  intimate  themselves  to  be  additions  and  not  original 
insertions. 

Looking  to  these  and  other  considerations  of  the  third  head,  the 
Book  has  not  only  a  civil,  but  also  a  moral  right  to  receive  the  service 
of  the  Eoman  orator  in  a  brief  speech,  as  one  exemplifying  its  own 
course  and  quoted  by  the  Tract :  "  The  historian  should  never  dare 
utter  what  is  false,  or  suppress  anything  that  is  true,  and  must 
always  keep  his  mind  above  prejudice  or  partiality." 


APPENDIX. 


(A.) 

A 
DIRECTION 

FOR 

A     PUBLICK     PROFESSION 

in  the    CHURCH    ASSEMBLY,    after    private    Examination   by  the 
ELDERS. 

Which  Direction  is  taken  out  of  the   Scripture,  and  Points  unto  that  Faith 
and  Covenant  contained  in  the  Scripture. 

Being  the  same  for   Substance  which  was  propounded   to,  and   agreed  upon 

by  the  Church  of  Salem  at  their  beginning,  the 

sixth  of  the  sixth  Moneth,  1629. 


In  the  Preface  to  the  Declaration  of  the  Faith  owned  and  professed  by 
the  Congregational  Churches  in  England.* 


The  Genuine  use  of  a  Confession  of  Faith  is,  that  under  the  same  Form  of 
"Words  thev  express  the  substance  of  the  same  common  Salvation  or  unity 
of  their  Faith.  Accordingly  it  is  to  be  looked  upon  as  a  fit  meanes,  whereby 
to  express  that  their  Common  Faith  and  Salvation,  and  not  to  be  made  use 
of  as  an  imposition  upon  an}-. 

*  These  two  lines,  being  separated  from  the  quotation,  to  which  they  are  an 
introduction,  led  the  writer  into  the  mistake  of  supposing  that  the  Direction, 
though  referring  immediately  to  the  Salem  Church,  was  published  by  the  Savoy 
Synod.  But  the  quotation  from  the  eighty-fifth  page  of  this  Church's  records 
decides  that  the  Direction  was  from  the  hand  of  John  Higginson,  and  printed 
under  his  supervision.  The  error,  with  a  right  application  of  the  facts  in  this 
work,  was  published  in  the  second  edition  of  the  Annals  of  Salem,  1  v.,  126  p., 
and  2  v.,  567  p.  The  Direction  was  seen  by  the  writer  more  than  twenty  years 
ago,  in  the  Boston  Athenaeum,  among  the  extensive  collection  made  by  the  late 
William  S.  Shaw,  Esq. 


24 

We  beseech  you  Brethren  to  know  them  that  labour  among  you,  and  are 
over  you  in  the  Lord,  and  admonish  you  to' esteem  them  very  highly  i?i  love 
for  their  work  sake,  and  be  at  peace  among  yourselves.     1  Thess.  5,  12,  13. 

Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  your  selves,  for  they 
watch  for  your  soules,  as  they  must  give  an  account,  that  they  may  do  it  with 
joy  and  not  with  grief,  for  that  is  unprofitable  for  you.     lleb.  13,  17. 

Who  is  that  tvise  and  faithfull  steward,  whom  his  Lord  shall  make  Ruler 
over  his  household,  to  give  them  their  portion  of  meat  in  due  season.  Luke 
12,42. 

One  Faith,  one  Baptism.     Eph.  4,  5. 

The  Common  Faith.     Tit.  1,4. 

The  common  Salvation.     Jude  Ver.  3. 

Christ  Jesus,  the  high  priest  of  our  Profession.     Heb.  3,  1. 

The  profession  of  our  Faith,     lleb.  10,  23. 

One  shall  say  I  am  the  Lords.     Isai.  44,  5. 

Hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words.     2  Tim.  1,13. 
The  form  of  Knowledge  and  of  the  truth.     Rom.  2,  20. 
The  form  of  Doctrine  delivered  unto  you.     Rom.  6,  17. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF   FAITH. 
I  do  believe  with  my  heart  and  confess  with  my  mouth, 
Concerning  God. 
That  there   is  but  one  only  true  God    in   three  persons,  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  each  of  them  God,  and  all  of  them  one  and  the  same 
Infinite,   Eternall  God,  most  Wise,   Holy,  Just,  Mercifull  and  Blessed  for- 
ever. 

Concerning  the  Works  of  God. 
That   this  God    is  the  Maker,   Preserver,  and    Governour   of  all  things 
according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  Will,  and  that   God  made  man  in  his 
own  Image,  in  Knowledge,  Holiness,  and  Righteousness. 

Concerning  the  fall  of  Man, 
That  Adam,  by  transgressing  the    Command  of  God,  fell  from  God  and 
brought  himself  and  his   posterity  into  a  state  of  sin   and  death,  under  the 
Wrath  and  Curse  of  God,  which  I  do  believe    to  be  my  own  condition  by 
nature  as  well  as  any  other. 

Concerning  Jesus  Christ. 
That  God  sent  his  Son  into  the  World,  who  for  our  sakes   became  man, 
that  he  might  redeem  and  save  us  by  his  Obedience  unto  death,  and  that  he 
arose  from  the  dead,  ascended  unto  Heaven  and  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  from  whence  he  shall  come  to  judge  the  World. 

Concerning  the  Holy  Ghost. 

That  God  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  fully  revealed  the  Doctrine  of  Christ  and 
will  of  God  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  which  are 
the  Word  of  God,  the  perfect,  perpetuall  and  only  Rule  of  our  Faith  and 
Obedience. 

Concerning  the  benefits  we  have  by  Christ. 

That  the  same  Spirit,  by  Working  Faith  in  God's  Elect,  applyeth  unto 
them  Christ  with  all  his  Benefits  of  justification  and  sanctification,  unto  Sal- 
vation, in  the  use  of  those  Ordinances  which  God  hath  appointed  in  his 
written  word,  which  therefore  ought  to  be  observed  by  us  until  the  coming 
nf  Christ. 


25 

Concerning  the  Church  of  Christ. 
That  all  true  Believers  being  united  unto  Christ  as  the  Head,  make  up 
one  Mistical!  Church,  which  is  the  Body  of  Christ,  the  members  whereof 
having  fellowship  with  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost  by  Faith,  and  one 
witli  another  in  love,  doe  receive  here  upon  earth  forgiveness  of  Sinnes,  with 
the  life  of  Grace,  and  at  the  Resurrection  of  the  Body  they  shall  receive 
everlasting  life.     Amen. 


THE    COVENANT. 

I  do  heartily  take  and  avouch  this  one  God  who  is  made  known  to  us  in 
the  Scripture,  by  the  Name  of  God  the  Father,  and  God  the  Son,  even 
Jesus  Christ,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  my  God,  according  to  the  ten- 
our  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace  ;  wherein  he  hath  promised  to  be  a  God  to 
the  Faithfull  and  their  seed  after  them  in  their  Generations,  and  taketh 
them  to  be  his  People,  and  therefore  unfeignedly  repenting  of  all  my  sins, 
I  do  give  up  myself  wholy  unto  this  God,  to  believe  in,  love,  serve  and  obey 
him  sincerely  and  faithfully  according  to  his  written  word,  against  all  the 
temptations  of  the  Devil,  the  World,  and  my  own  flesh,  and  this  unto  the 
death. 

I  do  also  consent  to  be  a  member  of  this  particular  Church,  promising  to  con- 
tinue steadfastly  in  fellowship  with  it,  in  the  publick  worship  of  God,  to 
submit  to  the  Order,  Discipline  and  Government  of  Christ  in  it,  and  to  the 
Ministerial  teaching,  guidance  and  oversight  of  the  Elders  of  it,  and  to  the 
brotherly  watch  of  Fellow  Members  ;  and  all  this  according  to  God's  Word, 
and  by  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  enabling  me  thereunto.  A  MEN. 

Questions  to  be  Answered  at  the  Baptizing  of  Children,  or  the 
substance  to  be  expressed  by  the  Parents. 

Quest.  Doe  you  present  and  give  up  this  child,  or  these  children,  unto 
God  the  Father,  Sonne  and  Holy  Ghost,  to  be  baptized  in  the  Faith,  and  en- 
gaged in  the  Covenant  of  God  professed  by  this  Church  ? 

Quest.  Doe  you  Sollemnly  Promise  in  the  presence  of  God,  that  by  the 
grace  of  Christ,  you  will  discharge  your  Covenant  duty  toicards  your  chil- 
dren, soe  as  to  bring  them  up  in  the  Nurture  and  Admonition  of  the  Lord, 
teaching  and  commanding  them  to  keep  the  icay  of  God,  that  they  may  be 
able  (through  the  grace  of  Christ)  to  make  a  personall  profession  of  their 
Faith  a>id  to  own  the  Covenant  oj  God  themselves  in  due  time. 

FINIS. 


26 


(B.) 

There  was  a  Church  Covenant  agreed  upon  and  consented  to  by  the  Church 

of  Salem  at  their  first  beginning  in  the  year,  1629,  Aug.  6. 
The  following    Covenant  was  propounded  by  the  Pastor,  agreed  upon  and 

consented  to  by  the  Brethren  of  the  Church,  in  the  year,  1636. 
Gather  my  Saints  unto  me  that  have  made  a  Covenant  with  me  by  Sacrifice, 

PsaL,  50.  5. 
We  whose  Names  are  underwritten,  Members  of  the  present  Church  of 
Christ  in  Salem,  having  found  by  sad  experience  how  dangerous  it  is  to  sit 
loose  from  the  Covenant  we  make  with  our  God,  and  how  apt  we  are  to 
wander  into  by  paths,  even  to  the  losing  of  our  first  aims  in  entring  into 
Church  Fellowship  ;  Do  therefore  solemnly  in  the  presence  of  the  Eternal 
God,  both  for  our  own  comforts,  and  those  who  shall  or  may  be  joyned  unto 
us,  renew  that  Church  Covenant  we  find  this  Church  bound  unto  at  their 
first  beginning,  viz.  That  we  covenant  with  the  Lord,  and  one  with  another, 
doe  bind  our  selves  in  the  presence  of  God  to  walk  together  in  all  his  wayes, 
according  as  he  is  pleased  to  reveal  himself  unto  us  in  his  blessed  word  of 
truth,  and  do  more  explicitly  in  the  name  and  fear  of  God,  profess  and  pro- 
test to  walk  as  followeth,  through  the  power  and  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. 

We  avouch  the  Lord  to  be  our  God,  and  our  selves  to  be  his  people,  in 
the  truth  and  simplicity  of  our  spirits. 

We  give  ourselves  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  and  the  word  of  his  grace, 
for  the  teaching,  ruling  and  sanctifying  of  us  in  matters  of  worship  and  con- 
versation, resolving  to  cleave  to  him  alone  for  life  and  glory,  and  to  oppose 
all  contrary  wayes,  Cannons  and  constitutions  of  men  in  his  worship. 

We  promise  to  walk  with  our  Brethren  and  Sisters  with  all  watchfulness, 
and  tenderness,  avoiding  jealousies  and  suspitions,  backbitings,  censurings, 
provokings,  secret  risings  of  spirit  against  them ;  but  in  all  offences,  to  follow 
the  rule  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  to  bear  and  forbear,  give  and  forgive  as  he 
hath  taught  us. 

In  publick  or  private  we  will  willingly  doe  nothing  to  the  offence  of  the 
Church  ;  but  will  be  willing  to  take  advice  for  our  selves  and  ours,  as  occa- 
sion shall  be  presented. 

We  will  not  in  the  Congregation  be  forward  either  to  shew  our  own  gifts 
and  parts,  in  speaking  and  scrupling  or  there  discover  the  weaknesses  and 
failings  of  our  Brethren,  but  attend  an  orderly  call  thereunto,  knowing  how 
much  the  Lord  may  be  dishonored,  and  his  Gospel  &  the  profession  of  it 
slighted  by  our  distempers  and  weaknesses  in  publick. 

We  bind  ourselves  to  study  the  advancement  of  the  Gospel  in  all  truth 
and  peace  both  in  regard  of  those  that  are  within  or  without,  no  way  slighting 
our  Sister  Churches,  but  using  their  council  as  need  shall  be,  not  laying  a 
stumbling  block  before  any,  no  not  the  Indians,  whose  good  we  desire  to 
promote,  and  so  to  converse  as  we  may  avoid  the  very  appearance  of  evil. 

We  doe  hereby  promise  to  carry  our  selves  in  all  lawful  obedience  to  those 
that  are  over  us  in  Church  or  Commonwealth,  knowing  how  well  and  pleas- 
ing it  will  be  to  the  Lord  that  they  should  have  encouragement  in  their 
places,  by  not  grieving  their  spirits  through  our  irregularityes. 

We  resolve  to  approve  our  selves  to  the  Lord  in  our  particular  Callings, 
shunning  idleness  as  the  bane  of  any  State,  nor  will  we  deal  hardly  or  op- 
pressingly  with  any  wherein  we  are  the  Lords  Stewards. 

Also  promising  to  our  best  ability  to  teach  our  Children  and  Servants  the 
knowledge  of  God  and  his  will,  that  they  serve  him  also;  and  all  this  not  by 
any  strength  of  our  own,  but  by  the  Lord  Christ,  whose  blood  we  desire  may 
sprinkle  this  our  Covenaut  made  in  his  Name. 


27 

This  forementioned  Covenant  was  often  read  and  Renewed  by  the  Church 
at  the  end  of  days  of  Humiliation,  especially  in  the  year  1660,  on  the  sixth  of 
the  first  moneth  :  when  also  considering  the  hour  of  Temptation  amongst  us  lnj 
reason  of  the  Quakers  Doctrine,  to  the  levening  of  some  in  the  place  where  we 
arc,  and  >  ndangering  of  others,  we  doe  see  canst;  to  remember  the  admonition 
of  our  Saviour  Christ  unto  his  disciples,  Math.  16.  Take  heed  and  lie  ware 
of  the  leven  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Pharisees.  And  doe  judge  it  (so  far  as 
we  understand  it)  that  the  Quakers  doctrine  is  as  bad  or  worse  than  that  of 
the  Pharisees.     Therefore, 

We  doe  Covenant  by  the  help  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  take  heed  and  beware 
of  the  leven  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Quakers. 

Also  this  following  Covenant  was  in  several  Church  Meetings  in  the  begin- 
ning of  this  year  1680,  considered  of,  agreed  upon,  and  consented  to  by  the 

</•  m  rality  of  the  Church,  to  be  used  as  a  direction  for  the  Renewing  of  our 
Church  <  'ovenant,  as  being  more  accommodated  to  the  present  times,  and  state 
of  things  amongst  us. 

Accordingly  it  was  made  use  of  in  that  wag  at  the  conclusion  of  the  publick 
Fast,  April  15,  1680.  viz. 

We,  who  (through  the  mercy  of  God)  are  Members  of  this  Church  of 
Saltm.  being  now  assembled  in  the  presence  of  God,  and  in  the  Name  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  after  bumble  confession  of  our  manifold  breaches  of  Cov- 
enant with  the  Lord  our  God,  and  earnest  supplication  for  his  pardoning 
mercy  through  the  blood  ot  Christ  ami  deep  acknowledgement  of  our  own 
unworthiness  to  be  owned  as  the  Lords  Covenant  People  ;  also  acknowledg- 
ing our  inability  to  keep  Covenant  with  God,  or  to  perform  any  spiritual 
duty  unlc--;  the  Lord  enable  us  thereunto  by  the  Grace  of  his  Spirit,  and  yet 
being  awfully  sensible  that  in  these  times  by  the  loud  voice  of  his  judgements 
both  felt  and  feared,  the  Lord  is  calling  us  all  to  Repentance  and  Reforma- 
tion;  we  doe  therefore  in  humble  confidence  of  his  gracious  assistance, 
through  Christ,  Renew  our  Covenant  with  God,  and  one  with  another  in  the 
manner  following. 

1.  We  doe  Liive  up  our  selves  to  that  God  whose  name  alone  is  Jehovah, 
Father,  Son  and  Spirit,  a-  the  only  true  and  living  God,  and  unto  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  as  our  only  Redeemer  and  8  iviour,  as  the  only  Prophet,  Priest  & 
King  over  our  Souls,  and  only  Mediator  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace,  engaging 
our  hearts  unto  this  God  in  Christ  by  the  help  of  his  Spirit  of  Grace  to 
cleave  unto  him  as  our  God  and  chief  good,  and  unto  Jesus  Christ  as  our 
Mediator  by  Faith,  in  a  way  of  Gospel  Obedience,  as  becometh  his  Covenant 
People  for  ever. 

2.  We  doe  also  give  up  our  Offspring  unto  God  in  Jesus  Christ,  avouching 
the  Lord  to  be  our  God  and  the  God  of  our  Children,  and  our  selves,  with  our 
Children  lo  be  his  People,  humbly  adoring  the  Grace  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus, 
that  we  &  our  Children  may  be  looked  upon  as  the  Lords. 

3.  We  do  also  give  up  ourselves  one  to  another  in  the  Lord  according 
to  the  will  of  God,  to  walk  together  as  a  Church  of  Christ  in  all  the  waves  of 
his  worship  and  service,  according  to  the  Rules  of  the  Word  of  God,  promis- 
ing in  brotherly  love  faithfully  to  watch  over  one  another's  Souls,  and  to  sub- 
mit our  selves  to  the  discipline  and  government  of  Christ  in  his  Church,  and 
duly  to  attend  the  Seals  and  Censures,  and  whatever  Ordinances  Christ 
hath  commanded  to  be  observed  by  his  people  according  to  the  order  of  the 
Gospel,  so  far  as  the  Lord  hath,  or  shall  reveal  unto  us. 

And  whereas  the  Elders  and  Messengers  of  these  churches  have  met  to- 
gether in  the  late  Synod  to  impure  into  the  Reasons  of  the  Lord's  Contro- 
versy with  his  people,  have  taken  notice  of  many  provoking  Evils  as  the  pro- 
curing causes  of  the  Judgements  of  God  upon  New-England,  so  far  as  we  or 


28 


any  of  us  have  been  guilty  of  those  Evils,  or  any  of  them,  (according  to  any 
light  held  forth  by  them  from  Scripture)  we  desire  from  our  hearts  to  bewail 
it  before  the  Lord ;  and  humbly  to  entreat  for  pardoning  mercy  for  the  sake 
of  the  blood  of  the  everlasting  Covenant.  And  as  an  expedient  unto  Refor- 
mation of  those  Evils,  or  whatever  else  have  provoked  the  Eyes  of  God's 
glory  amongst  us,  we  do  promise  and  engage  our  selves  in  the  presence 
of  God. 

1.  That  we  will  (by  the  help  of  Christ)  endeavour  every  one  to  reform 
his  own  heart  and  life,  by  seeking  to  mortify  all  our  sins  and  to  walk  more 
close  with  God  than  ever  we  have  done,  and  to  uphold  the  power  of  godli- 
ness, and  that  we  will  continue  to  worship  God,  in  public,  private  and  secret, 
and  this  (as  God  shall  help  us)  without  formality  and  hypocrasie,  and  more 
fully  and  faithfully  then  heretofore,  to  discharge  all  Covenant  duties  one  to- 
wards another  in  a  way  of  Church  Communion. 

2.  We  promise  by  the  help  of  Christ,  to  reform  our  Families,  and  to 
walk  before  God  in  our  houses  with  a  perfect  heart,  and  that  we  will  uphold 
the  Worship  of  God  therein  continually,  as  he  in  his  Word  doth  require  both 
in  respect  of  prayer,  and  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  that  we  will  do  what  lyes 
in  us  to  bring  up  our  Children  lor  God,  and  therefore  will  (so  far  as  there 
shall  be  need  of  it)  Catechize  them,  and  exhort  and  charge  them  to  fear 
and  serve  the  Lord,  and  endeavour  to  set  an  holy  Example  before  them,  and 
be  much  in  prayer  for  their  Conversion  and  Salvation. 

3.  We  do  further  engage  (the  Lord  helping  of  us)  to  endeavour  to  keep 
our  selves  pure  from  the  sins  of  the  Times,  and  what  lyes  in  us  to  help  for- 
ward the  Reformation  of  the  same  in  the  places  where  we  live,  denying  all 
ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  living  soberly,  righteously,  and  godly  in  this 
present  world,  making  Conscience  to  walk  so  as  to  give  no  offence  nor  to 
give  occasion  to  others  to  sin  or  to  speak  evil  of  our  holy  Profession. 

Finally,  giving  glory  to  the  Lord  our  God,  that  He  is  the  faithful  God, 
keeping  Covenant  and  mercy  with  his  people  for  ever,  but  confessing  that 
we  are  a  weak  and  sinful  people,  and  subject  many  wayes  to  break  our 
Covenant  with  him  ;  therefore  that  we  may  observe  and  keep  these  and  all 
other  Covenant  duties  required  of  us  in  the  word  of  God  ;  We  desire  to  deny 
our  selves,  and  to  depend  wholly  upon  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus  for 
the  constant  presence  and  assistance  of  his  holy  spirit  to  enable  us  thereunto, 
and  wherein  we  shall  fail,  we  shall  humbly  wait  upon  his  grace  in  Christ  for 
pardon,  for  Acceptance,  and  for  healing,  for  his  Name's  sake.   Amen. 

FINIS. 


